QIRĀ’ĀT IMAM IBN ʿĀMIR IN THE VIEWS OF IMAM AL-

ṬABARIYY AND IMAM IBN MUJĀHID:

AN ANALYTICAL STUDY

Yasir Hamad Mahmood

Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN QURAN AND SUNNAH

UNIVERSITI SAINS ISLAM MALAYSIA

August 2020

ii

AUTHOR DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the work in this thesis is my own except for quotations and

summaries which have been duly acknowledged.

Date: Signature:

Name: Yasir Hamad Mahmood

Matric No: 4140265

Address: 24-6 De Centrum, Jln.

Ikram, Uniten, Kajang, Selangor 43000

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks, are true to God Almighty Worthy of all praise and his messenger

Muhammad . "The one who does not thank people does not thank God." Hence, I

wish to express my sincere gratitude to Prof Madya dr. Adnan bin Mohamed Yusuff,

who has supervised this study with constant care and patience. He has indeed spared

time in supporting this research at all stages with his guidance, respect and kind

encouragement. In particular, I have greatly benefited from diverse sources to which he

has directed me. My acknowledgement would be incomplete without extending my

thanks to dr. Abdul Rahman Hussein Obeid who He continually and convincingly

conveyed a spirit of adventure and excitement regarding research. Without his guidance

and persistent help, this dissertation would not have been possible. Besides, I would like

to extend my thanks to the Faculty of Quranic and Sunnah Studies, my innumerable

colleagues and friends who have helped me in one way or another. My deepest

appreciation to my parents, who never stop blessing me with their sincere prayer, which

helped me during my study. Last and certainly not least, my indebtedness due to the

soul of my deceased honourable Sheikh Yasin which under his supervision and

guidance I got my certificate in the recitation and memorizing at the earliest stage of

my life.

Finally, my special thanks to my wife who has stood with me supporting me, even

though she is far away from her own family.

iv

ABSTRAK

Para sarjana secara awam bersetuju bahawa terdapat tiga syarat kesahan sesebuah

qirā’ah: sanad yang sahih dan tepat, kesesuaian dengan ortografi ʿUthmāni, dan

kefasihan bahasa Arab serta ketepatan nahu. Ibn Mujāhid telah memasukkan Qirā’ah

Ibn ʿĀmir sebagai salah satu daripada tujuh bacaan yang mutawātir kerana ia

bersesuaian dengan al-Muṣḥaf al-Shāmiyy. Sebaliknya, al-Ṭabariyy menolak qirā’ah

tersebut, sebagaimana yang ia sebutkan dengan jelas dalam Jāmiʿ al-Bayān. Perbezaan

pendapat ini berkekalan meskipun al-Ṭabariyy memiliki pengaruh yang kuat terhadap

Ibn Mujāhid sebagai seorang guru. Bertolak dari masalah ini, kajian ini mencuba

menyelesaikan empat tujuan: (i) membincangkan perkembangan tujuh qirā’āt sebelum

dan semasa Ibn ʿĀmir; (ii) menganalisis konsep mutawātir dalam pandangan al-

Ṭabariyy dan Ibn Mujāhid; (iii) membincangkan factor-faktor yang menyebabkan al-

Ṭabariyy dan Ibn Mujāhid menolak/menerima Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir; dan (iv) menilai

rantaian, ṭuruq, dan uṣūl daripada Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir. Kajian ini menggunakan

metodologi kualitatif dan pendekatan deskriptif-analitik untuk mencapai objektif-

objektif tersebut. Ia mendapati beberapa temuan penting: pertama, jumlah qirā’āt telah

berlipat ganda sejak masa sahabat sehingga masa tabi-tabiin. Namun, jumlah ini

menurun sedikit demi sedikit disebabkan perubahan kepada aspek penekanan para

ulama. Tambahan lagi, beberapa sarjana hanya mengumpulkan beberapa qirā’āt di

dalam buku-buku mereka, memberikan kesan bahawa qirā’āt berkenaan sahajalah yang

mutawātir. Kedua, konsep mutawātir dalam pandangan al-Ṭabariyy hampir serupa

dengan konsep sarjana hadis. Tambahan lagi, beliau tidak hanya cukup dengan ketiga

syarat di atas, tapi juga mengatakan bahawa sesebuah qirā’ah itu boleh diterima apabila

ia merupakan kesepakatan dan masyhur di kalangan pembaca Qur’ān. Konsep Ibn

Mujāhid hampir sama: bacaan mutawātir adalah yang merupakan ijmak di kalangan

sarjana dan orang awam, serta dibaca oleh seluruh penduduk daripada sesebuah negeri.

Ketiga, al-Ṭabariyy menolah Qirā’ah Ibn ʿ Āmir disebabkan sanad-nya yang tidak boleh

dipercaya, dan juga kerana sahabat yang menjadi sumber bacaan tersebut, yakni

ʿUthmān, tidak pernah dilaporkan pernah mengajarkan qirā’ah kepada sesiapapun. Ibn

Mujāhid menerimanya kerana bacaan tersebut tersebar luas di Kufah. Walaupun

demikian, beliau tetap mengkritik beberapa bahagiannya yang tidak bersesuaian dengan

nahu bahasa Arab.

v

ABSTRACT

Scholars have generally agreed on three conditions for the validity of qirā’āt: authentic

and sound sanad, congruence with ʿUthmānic orthography, and eloquent Arabic and

proper grammar. Ibn Mujāhid had included Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir as one of the seven

qirā’āt mutawātirah. On the other hand, al-Ṭabariyy rejected the qirā’ah, as explicitly

stated in Jāmiʿ al-Bayān. This conflict of opinion persisted despite al-Ṭabariyy’s strong

influence on Ibn Mujāhid as a teacher. Against this problem, the research sought to

accomplish four objectives: (i) to discuss the development of seven qirā’āt before and

during the lifetime of Ibn ʿĀmir; (ii) to analyze the mutawātir concept of both al-

Ṭabariyy and Ibn Mujāhid; (iii) to discuss the factors behind the rejection or approval

of Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir by al-Ṭabariyy and Ibn Mujāhid; and (iv) to evaluate the chain,

ṭuruq, and uṣūl of Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir. The research employed the qualitative

methodology and used the descriptive-analytical approach to accomplish these

objectives. It revealed a number of important findings: first, the number of qirā’āt had

exponentially grown since the era of the companions up to next two generation. The

number of qirā’āt, however, gradually dwindled as qirā’āt seekers shift their focus, and

because some scholars compiled only certain qirā’āt into their books, leaving the

impression that those were the only mutawātir recitations. Second, al-Ṭabariyy’s

conception of mutawātir in qirā’āt is almost similar to that of hadith scholars.

Additionally, he did not suffice with the three abovementioned conditions, but also

added that a qirā’ah is accepted if it is a subject of consensus and popular among

reciters. Ibn Mujāhid’s concept is almost similar: a mutawātir recitation is that which is

a subject of consensus among scholars and the laymen and is read by the entire populace

of a given province. Third, al-Ṭabariyy rejected Ibn ʿĀmir’s qirā’ah on the basis that

its sanad is untrustworthy, and that the companion from whom the variant was narrated,

ʿUthmān, had never been reported to have taught qirā’ah to anyone. Ibn Mujāhid,

meanwhile, accepted it as it was a prevalent recitation in Kufah. However, he still

criticized some of its aspects that contravene proper Arabic grammar.

vi

الملخص

اتفق العلماء عامة على أن شروط القراءة املتواترة الصحيحة ثالثة: التواتر، موافقة رسم املصحف، موافقة تواتر سندها ومن لوجه من وجوه اللغة العربية. ابن جماهد كان قد قبل بقراءة ابن عامر وعدها من املتواتر

البيان. وقد ظهر ه جامع كتابه تفسي جهة أخرى فإن الطربي رفضها ومل يعدها من املتواتر وصرح بذلك يفالتعارض بني العاملني اجلليلني ابلرغم من العالقة بينهما وهي عالقة الطالب ابألستاذ. ولبيان هذه هذا

حياة املشكلة كان هذا البحث حماولة للوصول إىل األهداف التالية وبياهنا: مناقشة تطور القراءات قبلالعوامل وملناقشة حليل وبيان املعىن ملصطلح التواتر لإلمامني الطربي وابن جماهد. لتوأثناءها اإلمام ابن عامر

رفض قراءة ابن عامر البن جماهد والطربي وأخياً لتقييم وبيان سند قراءة ابن عامر وطرقها أووراء قبول والذي قاد املنهج الوصفي التحليلي لتحقيق أهداف البحث و املنهج الكيفي وأصوهلا. واستخدم الباحث

إىل نتائج قيمة منها: أوالً: إن عدد القراءات ظهر منذ زمن الصحابة وتزايد مبرور الوقت. ومع ذلك فإن ذلك االهتمام هبذا العلم وبسبب تضمني العلماء بعض القراءات ستمرطاليب علم القراءات قد قلوا ومل ي

هو املتواتر فقط وما مل يذكر فال يعد متواتراً أبن ما ذكر اً ترك انطباعمما دون ذكر البعض اآلخر يف كتبهم البالد. اثنياً: إن مفهوم الطربي للمتواتر هو نفسه مفهوم أهل احلديث ابإلضافة يف ومل يعد يقرأ هبا اآلن

إىل أن شروط القراءات وإن مل تكن وضعت بعد إال أن الطربي كان له مفهومه اخلاص هلا وعد التواتر من ءة وبدونه فإن القراءة هتمل وال تذكر ومن انحية أخرى فإن مفهوم ابن جماهد للتواتر يكاد أهم مميزات القرا

س مفهوم الطربي من حيث شهرة القراءة وشيوعها بني القراء ولكن أبقل حدية من الطربي حيث فيكون ن شرطيني أن بعض القراءات عدها من املشهور الصحيح عندما قل سندها وضعف ولكن كانت متوافقة مع ال

عتربه ال أصل له وذكر أدلته ااآلخرين للقراءة. اثلثاً: رفض الطربي قراءة ابن عامر بناءاً على سندها حيث أحداً. بينما ابن جماهد قبلها وعدها من القراءات قرئيلذلك الرفض وعللها أبن عثمان رضي هللا عنه مل

املتواترة ومع ذلك القبول إال أنه قد جرح يف بعض املواطن اليت مل تكن موافقة للغة العربية وذكر سبب التغليط وبينه يف كتابه السبعة يف القراءات.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENT PAGE

AUTHOR DECLARATION ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

ABSTRAK iv

ABSTRACT v

vi الملخص

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF TRANSLITERATIONS x

INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Research Background 1

1.1.1 Reasons for the Revelation of Qur’ān in Aḥruf 2

1.1.2 The Seven Qurrā’ 3

1.1.3 Emergence of the Three Conditions for the Validity of Qirā’āt 8

1.2 Problem Statement 13

1.3 Research Objectives 14

1.4 Research Questions 15

1.5 Limitations of The Study 15

1.6 Significance of The Study 16

1.7 Terms of the Study 16

1.8 Research Methodology 18

1.8.1 Data Collection 18

1.8.2 Data Analysis 18

1.9 Literature Review 19

1.9.1 Dissertations 19

1.9.2 Published Research 22

1.10 Structure of the Thesis 24

QIRĀ’AH IMAM IBN ʿĀMIR, HIS ṬURUQ AND UṢŪL, AND HIS REPUTATION

AMONG QIRĀ’ĀT SCHOLARS 25

2.1Introduction 25

2.2Ibn ʿĀmir 25

2.3 His Ruwāt 27

2.4 The Principles of Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir 28

2.4.1 Istiʿādhah and Basmalah 28

2.4.2 Hā’ al-Kināyah 29

2.4.3 Elongation and Shortening of Vowels (al-Madd wa al-Qaṣr) 30

2.4.4 Two Successive Hamzah in a Word 30

2.4.5 Hamzah Mufrad 34

2.4.6 Hishām’s Wujūh in Stopping at a Final Hamzah (al-Hamzah al-

Mutaṭarrifah) 35

2.4.7 Idghām 42

2.4.7.1 Large Idghām 42

2.4.7.2 Small Idghām 43

2.4.8 Imālah 44

2.4.9 Articulating Rā’ and Lām 45

viii

2.4.10 Stopping at the End of Words 46

2.4.11 Stopping according to the Written Text 46

2.4.12 Adjunct Yā’ (Yā’āt al-Iḍāfah) 47

2.4.13 Supplemental Yā’ (Yā’āt al-Zawā’id) 47

2.5 Summary 48

QIRĀ’AH IMAM IBN ʿĀMIR ACCORDING TO HIS MUSHAF 49

3.1 Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir till Al-Kahf 49

3.2 Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir from Al-Kahf till the last surah 104

THE DEVELOPMENT OF QIRĀ’ĀT BEFORE AND DURING THE ERA OF

IMAM IBN ʿĀMIR 169

4.1 Introduction 169

4.2 The Meaning of the Seven Aḥruf and their Differences from Seven Qirā’āt 170

4.2.1 The Meaning of Aḥruf in Arabic 174

4.2.2 The Meaning of the Seven Aḥruf in the Hadith 175

4.2.3 The Interpretation of Seven Aḥruf 177

4.2.4 Al-Ṭabariyy’s Interpretation of the Ḥurūf 181

4.3 The Development of the Seven Qirā’āt before Imam Ibn ʿĀmir 183

4.3.1 The First Phase: Era of the Prophet 183

4.3.2 The Second Phase: Era of the Righteous Caliphs 185

4.3.3 The Third Phase: Emergence of the Features of Qirā’āt Schools 188

4.4 The Development of the Seven Qirā’āt during the Lifetime of Imam Ibn ʿĀmir

190

4.4.1 The Emergence of Ikhtiyār in Qirā’āt 191

4.4.2 Justification to Restrict Qirā’āt to Seven 197

4.4.3 Types of Qirā’āt 200

4.5 Summary 201

MUTAWĀTIR FROM THE PERSPECTIVES OF HADITH SCHOLARS, IBN

MUJĀHID, AND AL-ṬABARIYY 203

5.1 Introduction 203

5.2 Hadith Scholars’ Conception of Mutawâtir 203

5.2.1 Etymological and Technical Definition of Sanad 203

5.2.2 The Devotion of Muslim Scholars to Isnād 204

5.2.3 Tawātur according to Hadith Scholars 211

5.2.4 Conditions of Mutawātir according to Hadith Scholars 212

5.3 Qiraat Scholars’ Conception of Mutawatir 213

5.3.1 Devotion of Qirā’āt Scholars to Isnād 213

5.4 Ibn Mujāhid’s Criteria of Tawātur 214

5.5 Al-Ṭabariyy’s Criteria of Tawātur 219

5.6 Summary 220

QIRĀ’ĀT IBN ʿĀMIR IN THE PERSPECTIVES OF IMAM AL–ṬABARIYY AND

IMAM IBN MUJĀHID 222

6.1 Introduction 222

6.2 Qirā’āt Criticism Before al-Ṭabariyy and Ibn Mujāhid 222

6.2.1ʿĀ’ishah Umm al-Mu’minīn (d. 58 AH) 222

6.2.2 Saʿd ibn Abī Waqqāṣ (d. 51 AH) 223

6.2.3ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68 AH) 223

6.2.4ʿĀṣim al-Jaḥdariyy (d. 128 AH) 224

ix

6.2.5 Abū ʿAmr ibn al-ʿAlā’ (d. 154 AH) 224

6.2.6 Hārūn al-Aʿwar (d. 170 AH) 225

6.2.7 Abū al-Ḥasan al-Akhfash (d. 177 AH) 225

6.2.8 Sibawayh (d. 180 AH) 226

6.2.9 Al-Kisā’iyy (d. 189 AH) 226

6.2.10 Abū Zakariyyā al-Farrā’ (d. 207 AH) 227

6.2.11 Al-Aṣmaʿiyy (d. 216 AH) 227

6.2.12 Abū ʿUbayd al-Qāsim ibn Sallām (d. 224 AH) 228

6.2.13 Abū ʿUthmān al-Māziniyy (d. 249 AH) 228

6.2.14 Abū Ḥātim al-Sijistāniyy (d. 255 AH) 228

6.2.15 Ibn Qutaybah (d. 276 AH) 229

6.2.16 Abū al-ʿAbbās al-Mubarrad (d. 285 AH) 229

6.3 Imam al-Ṭabariyy’s Approach to Evaluating Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir 230

6.3.1 Al-Ṭabariyy’s Criteria for Ikhtiyār in Qirā’āt 230

6.3.2 Al-Ṭabariyy’s Approach to Presenting Qirā’āt in His al-Bayān 231

6.3.3 Al-Ṭabari’s Claims about the Isnād of Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir and their

Refutations 235

6.3.4 The Refutations of Abū ʿAmr al-Dānī against Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭabariyy on the

Continuity of Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir 246

6.4 Imam Ibn Mujāhid’s Approach to Assessing Qirā’āt Ibn ʿĀmir 256

6.4.1 Ibn Mujāhid’s Approach to Discussing Qirā’āt in Kitāb al-Sabʿah 256

6.4.2 Ibn Mujāhid’s Criticism of Qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir 262

6.5 Summary 263

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 265

7.1 Summary of Results 265

7.2 Suggestions 267

REFERENCES 269

x

LIST OF TRANSLITERATIONS

ā (vowel) ا ء ‘B ب T ت Th ث J ج ḥ ح

Kh خ D د Dh ذ R ر Z ز S س Sh ش ṣ ص ḍ ض ṭ ط ẓ ظ ʿ ع

Gh غ F ف Q ق K ك L ل M م N ن H ه

w or ū (vowel) و y or ī (vowel) ي

a (short vowel as in ago) َ u (short vowel as in put) َ i (short vowel as in fit) َ

H ة

1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Research Background

The Qur’ān is the holy book of Muslims that offers timeless guidance and

lessons. In recent years, Muslims have become increasingly aware of the importance of

reading the Qur’ān. Accompanying this phenomenon is their realization that the Qur’ān

has to be recited accurately and beautifully. This realization has culminated into the

concept of qirā’āt.1 The science revolves around the recitation of the Holy Qur’ān that

is consistent with the rules and oral recitation of the readers of Qur’ān (qurrā’).2 It bears

highlighting that a correct recitation adheres to the rules of tajwīd.3

Looking into the history of the emergence of qirā’āt, the Prophet Muḥammad

initially shared what was revealed to him to his companions , who then committed

to the Prophet’s recitation. It should be noted that the Prophet recited the Holy Qur’ān

in many aḥruf. In a hadith narrated by ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās , the Prophet said:

“Gabriel recited the Qur’ān to me in one ḥarf. Then I requested him (to read it in

another ḥarf) and I continued doing so until he ultimately recited it in seven aḥruf.”4

1Al-Bāz, Muḥammad ʿAbbās. 2004. Mabāhith fī ʿIlm al-Qirā’āt maʿa Bayān Ushūl Riwāyah al-Ḥafṣ.

Al-Qāhirah: Dār al-Kalimah. p. 45. 2ibid. p. 46. 3Al-Marṣafiyy, ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ al-Sayd ʿAjmiyy. n.d. Hidāyah al-Qārī ilā Tajwīd Kalām al-Bārī. Al-

Madīnah al-Munawwarah: Maktabah Ṭayyibah. p. 51. 4Al-Bukhāriyy, Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl. 2012. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhāri. Madīnah al-Naṣr: Dār al-Ta’ṣīl. Juz’ 6:

kitab Faḍā’il al-Qur’ān - bab 'unzil alquran ealaa sbet 'ahraf hadith number 4991pp. 481-482; Al-

Naysabūrī, Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj. 2014. Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Madīnah al-Naṣr: Dār al-Ta’ṣīl. Juz’ 1: p. 561.

2

The companions , as a result, recited in various aḥruf as well. Whenever the

companions heard something different in the ways the Qur’ān was recited among

themselves, they approached the Prophet and confirmed the validity of the

recitation.5

1.1.1 Reasons for the Revelation of Qur’ān in Aḥruf

Some scholars believe that the aḥruf were revealed in Mecca while others

suggest that they were revealed in Madinah. Nonetheless, they all agreed that the Qur’ān

was revealed in multiple aḥruf.6

The reasons behind such a revelation were to make recitation easier for the

entire ummah and to clear the meaning of the Qur’ān, as mentioned by the hadith.

Through their revelation, the diverse tribes of Arabia were able to commit to the

Muslim added, “Ibn Shihāb al-Zuhriyy said, ‘It has been narrated to me that these seven aḥruf have a

single meaning and do not differ concerning ḥalāl or ḥarām.’” 5ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb narrated, “I heard Hishām bin Ḥākim reciting al-Furqān during the lifetime of

the Prophet . I listened to his recitation and realized that the way (i.e., ḥarf) he recited was different

from the way the Prophet had taught me. It angered me to see him reciting it that way. I wanted to

express my anger to him but as he was in the course of performing his prayer, I had to control my temper

and wait until he finished performing his prayer. Once he finished performing his prayer, I put his upper

garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, ‘Who taught you this sūrah which I heard you

reciting?’ to which he replied, ‘It was the Prophet who taught me.’ In response, I said, ‘That was an

outright lie, for the Prophet taught me to recite the Holy Qur’ān in a way that is different from that you

were reciting.’ In order to resolve our dispute, I had to bring him before the Prophet , and I said to The

Prophet , ‘I heard this person reciting al-Furqān in a way which you haven’t taught me!’ As a response,

the Prophet said, ‘Release him, O ʿUmar! Recite, O Hishām!’ The Prophet and I heard him reciting

the Qur’ān the same way I had heard him recited. Upon carefully listening, the Prophet then said, ‘It

was revealed this way,’ and he subsequently asked me to recite it by saying, ‘Recite, O ʿUmar!’ I obliged

by reciting it in the way that he had taught me. Upon carefully listening, the Prophet said that, ‘It was

revealed this way.’” Reviewing scholarly works, it can be concluded that the Qur’ān was recited in seven

modes (aḥruf), and the Prophet had instructed Muslims to “recite it in whichever mode (ḥarf) that is

easier for you.” See: Al-Bukhāriyy. 2012. Ṣaḥīh Bukhāriyy. Juz’ 4: p. 482. kitab Faḍā’il al-Qur’ān - bab

'unzil alquran ealaa sbet 'ahraf hadith number 4991. 6Al-Quḍāh, Muḥammad Aḥmad Mufliḥ et al. 2001. Muqaddimāt fī ʿIlm al-Qirā’āt. ʿAmmān: Dār

ʿAmmār. p. 52.

3

recitation despite its difficulty, considering that they were mostly illiterate and had

distinctive ethnic, linguistic, and cultural backgrounds.7

Gradually, different recitations started to appear when the tribes started

practicing Islam and reciting the Qur’ān. The companions who were sent to the

provinces to teach Islam noticed the diversity in recitation among the tribes, and so they

informed Caliph ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān of the matter. After receiving the message, he

ordered the companions to write the masāḥif, which were later distributed to the

provinces.8 Upon carefully assessing those maṣāḥif, one may discover that the qirā’āt

have been incorporated into them, and they have been unanimously approved by the

companions of the Prophet .9

1.1.2 The Seven Qurrā’

Ibn Mujāhid included seven qirā’āt in his book Kitāb Al-Sabʿah.10 Makkiyy

explained the reason for his decision, “There were quite a number of ruwāt in the second

and third centuries, but there was no consensus among them (on valid qirā’āt). In the

fourth century, people started to search for qirā’āt that adhered to Maṣāḥif

7Al-Qaṭṭān, Mannāʿ ibn Khalīl. 1991. Nuzūl al-Qur’ān ʿalā Sabʿati Aḥruf. Al-Qāhirah: Maktabah

Wahbah. p. 7. 8Anas narrated, “ʿUthmān summoned Zaid ibn Thābit, ʿAbdullāh ibn al-Zubayr, Sa’īd ibn al-ʿĀṣ, and

ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn al-Ḥārith ibn Hishām, and then they wrote the manuscripts of the Holy Qur’ān in

the form of book in several copies. ʿUthmān said to the three Qurayshi, ‘If you differ with Zaid ibn Thābit

on any point of the Qur’ān, then write it in the language of Quraysh, as the Qur’ān was revealed in their

language,’ so they acted accordingly.” (Saʿīd ibn Thābit was an Anṣārī and not from Quraysh). Al-

Bukhāri. 2012. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhāri. Juz’ 4: p. 709. 9Al-Zarqāniyy, Muḥammad ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm. 1943. Manāhil al-ʿIrfān fī ʿUlūm al-Qur’ān. Al-Qāhirah:

Maṭbaʿah ʿĪsā al-Bābī al-Ḥalabī wa Shurakā’uh. Juz’ 1: p. 168. 10Al-Qaysiyy, Makkiyy ibn Abī Ṭālib. 1977. Al-Ibānah ʿan Maʿāni al-Qirā’āt. Al-Jīzah: Dār Nahḍah

Miṣra. p. 23.

4

ʿUthmāniyyah and were widely recited by the companions . Therefore, they referred

to Ibn Mujāhid’s list and followed it confidently.” 11

The seven qurrā’ specified by Ibn Mujāhid are:12

1. Nāfiʿ al-Madaniyy: Abū Ruwaym ibn ʿAbd ar-Rahmān ibn Abī Nāʿim al-

Laythiyy (70-169AH), who transmitted to:

a. Warsh: Abū Sa’īd ʿUthmān ibn Sa’īd al-Quṭbiyy (110-197 H).

b. Qālūn: Abū Mūsa ʿĪsā ibn Mīnā al-Zarqiyy (120-220 H).

2. Ibn Kathīr al-Makkiyy: Abū Ma’bad ʿAbdullāh al-’Attār (45-120 H), who

transmitted to:

a. Al-Bazziyy: Abū al-Ḥasan Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn al-

Qāsim ibn Nāfiʿ ibn Abī Buzzah (170–250 H).

b. Qunbul: Abū ʿAmr Muḥammad ibn ‘Abd ar-Raḥmān al-

Makhzūmiyy (195-291 H).

3. Abū ʻAmr ibn al-ʻAlāʼ al-Baṣriyy (70-154 H), who transmitted to:

a. Al-Dūriyy: Abū ʿAmr Ḥafṣ ibn ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Baghdadiyy

(-246 H).

b. Al-Sūsī: Abū Shuʿayb Ṣāliḥ ibn Ziyād ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn Ismāʿīl ibn al-

Jārūd ar-Riqqiyy (-261 H).

4. Ibn ʿĀmir: ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿĀmir ibn Yazīd ibn Tamīm ibn Rabīʿah al-Yahṣibiyy

(8-118 H), who transmitted to:

11Al-Qaysiyy, Makkiyy ibn Abī Ṭālib. 1977. Al-Ibānah ʿan Maʿāni al-Qirā’āt. Al-Jīzah: Dār Nahḍah

Miṣra. p. 23. 12Ibn Mujāhid, Abū Bakr. 1980. Kitāb al-Sabʿah fī al-Qirā’āt. Al-Qāhirah: Dār al-Maʿārif. p. 26.

5

a. Hishām: Abū al-Walīd Hishām ibn ʿAmmār ibn Nuṣayr ibn Maysarah

al-Salamiyy al-Dimashqiyy (153-245 H).

b. Ibn Dhakwān: Abū ʿAmr ʿAbdullāh ibn Aḥmad al-Qurayshiyy al-

Dimashqiyy (173-242 H).

5. Āṣim al-Kūfiyy: Abū Bakr ʿĀṣim ibn Abī al-Najūd al-Asadiyy (-127 H), who

transmitted to:

a. Shuʿbah: Abū Bakr Shuʿbah ibn ʿAyyāsh ibn Sālim al-Kūfiyy an-

Nahshaliyy (95-193 H).

b. Ḥafṣ: Abū ʿAmr Ḥafṣ ibn Sulaymān ibn al-Mughīrah ibn Abī Dāwūd al-

Asadī al-Kūfiyy (90-180 H).

6. Ḥamzah al-Kūfiyy: Abū ʿ Imārah Ḥamzah ibn Ḥabīb al-Zayyāt al-Taymiyy (80-

156H), who transmitted to:

a. Khalaf: Abū Muḥammad al-Asadī al-Bazzār al-Baghdadiyy (150-229

H).

b. Khallād: Abū ʿĪsā Khallād ibn Khālid al-Baghdadiyy (-220 H).

7. Al-Kisā’i al-Kūfiyy: Abū al-Ḥasan ʿAli ibn Ḥamzah al-Farsiyy al-Asadiyy

(119-189 H), who transmitted to:

a. Al-Layth: Abū al-Ḥarith al-Layth ibn Khālid al-Baghdadiyy (-240 H).

b. Al-Dūrī: Ḥafṣ, also narrated from Abū ʿAmr.

Ibn al-Jazariyy (751H) then added another three qurrā’:13

13Ibn al-Jazariyy, Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad. n.d. Al-Nashr fī al-Qirā’āt al-ʿAshr. Bayrūt: Dār al-Kutub

al-ʿIlmiyyah. Juz’ 1: p. 24.

6

1. Abū Jaʿfar: Yazīd ibn al-Qaʿqaʿ al-Makhzūmiyy al-Madaniyy (-130 H), who

transmitted to:

a. ʿĪsā ibn Wirdān: Abū al-Ḥārith al-Madaniyy (-160H).

b. Ibn Jummāz: Abū ar-Rābiʿ Sulaymān ibn Muslim ibn Jummāz al-

Madaniyy (-170H).

2. Yaʿqūb: Abū Muḥammad, Yaʿqūb ibn Isḥāq ibn Zayd ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn Abī

Isḥāq al-Ḥaḍramiyy al-Baṣriyy (117-205 H), who transmitted to:

a. Ruways: Abū ʿAbdillāh Muḥammad ibn al-Mutawakkil al-Baṣriyy (-

238 H).

b. Rawḥ: Abū al-Ḥasan Rawḥ ibn ʿAbd al-Mu’min al-Baṣriyy al-

Hudhaliyy (-234 H).

3. Khalaf: narrator of Ḥamzah, who transmitted to:

a. Isḥāq: Abū Yaʿqūb Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm ibn ʿUthmān al-Marūziyy al-

Baghdadiyy (286H).

b. Idrīs: Abū al-Ḥasan Idrīs ibn ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Ḥaddād al-Baghdadiyy

(189-292H).

Forty books had been written on qirā’āt before Ibn Mujāhid’s text,14 though

some of them selected only one variant of recitation, while others included up to 25.

None of them, however, selected seven, except Ibn Mujāhid. Among these writings

were:15

1. Faḍā’il al-Qur’ān, Al-Qāsim ibn Salām (224H).

2. Kitāb al-Qirā’āt, Khalaf ibn Hishām al-Bazzār (229H).

14ibid. Juz’ 1: p. 34. 15Al-Nadīm, Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq. 1997. Al-Fihrisat. Bayrūt: Dār al-Maʿrifah. p. 53.

7

3. Kitāb al-Qirā’āt, Ibn Saʿdān (231H).

4. Kitāb al-Qirā’āt, Abū Hātim al-Sijistāniyy (250H).

5. Ahmed bin Jubair Al-Kufi (258H)

6. Kitāb al-Qirā’āt, Ibn Qutaybah (276H).

7. Ismail bin Ishaq al-Maliki (282H)

8. Kitāb al-Qirā’āt, Thaʿlabiyy (291H).

9. Kitāb al-Qirā’āt, al-Ṭabariyy (310H), though it is lost. In the book, he collected

more than 20 qirā’āt.

10. Abu Bakr Dajuni (324H)

And these were the books written after Ibn Mujāhid:

1. Abu Bakr Al-Shatha'i (370H)

2. Ibn Khalouh (370)

3. Abu Ali Al-Farsi (377H)

4. Abu Bakr bin Mahran, (381H)

5. Al-Khuzaie (408H)

6. Talcmani (429H)

7. Makki bin Talib (437H)

8. Abu Omar Aldani (444H)

9. Ahwazi (446H)

10. Al-Hudhali (465H)

11. Abu Maashar al-Tabari (478H)

12. Abu Al-Qasim Alexandria (629H)

8

1.1.3 Emergence of the Three Conditions for the Validity of Qirā’āt

The companions and their successors read the Quran as they had been taught by

the Prophet or those authorized by him. During the time of the companions, the only

condition for the authenticity and acceptability of a qirā’ah was its consistence with

narration. This was the mainstay to which the companions referred whenever they

disagreed on a reading, as mentioned in the hadith between ʿUmar and Hishām ibn

Hākim.16 The successors, on the other hand, referred to the qirā’ah of preeminent

reciters among the companions, such as Ubayy ibn Kaʿb, ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd, and

Zayd ibn Thābit.17 Accordingly, scholars unanimously agreed that a qirā’ah must be

learned directly from a reciter who has learned it from his teacher, and so forth, until

the sanad (chain of transmission) traces back to the Prophet. The continuity of the chain

up to the Prophet indicates that he had indeed learned the qirā’ah from Jibrīl, and that

he had accordingly recited and taught it to his companions.18

After ʿUthmān had compiled the Qur’ān into a muṣḥaf, the reciters were asked

to read only according to it, and personal Qur’ānic manuscripts were collected and

destroyed.19 Eventually, the ʿUthmānic maṣāḥif spread to every province of the Islamic

state (with some slight resistance, for instance from Ibn Masʿūd and Ibn Shunbūdh). Al-

Qasṭallāniyy stated that some innovators (mubtadiʿ) read the Qur’ān from the maṣāḥif

without referring to any narrations in order to support their theological views. One such

example is the Muʿtazilites’ reading of “Wa kallama Allāha Mūsā taklīmā” instead of

16Al-Bukhāriyy. 2012. Ṣaḥīh Bukhāriyy. Juz’ 4: p. 482. kitab Faḍā’il al-Qur’ān - bab 'unzil alquran ealaa

sbet 'ahraf hadith number 4992 17Al-Jaʿbariyy, Burhān al-Dīn Ibrāhim ibn ʿUmar. 2011. Kanz al-Maʿānī fī Sharḥ Ḥirz al-Amānī. Al-

Jīzah: Maktabah Awlād al-Shaykh li al-Turāth. Juz’ 15: p. 123. 18Al-Bukhāriyy. 2012. Ṣaḥīh Bukhāriyy. Juz’ 4: pp. 48l-483. kitab Faḍā’il al-Qur’ān - bab 'unzil alquran

ealaa sbet 'ahraf hadith number 4992 19ibid., pp. 482-483, 485-486.

9

the correct recitation “Wa kallama Allāhu Mūsā taklīmā”.20 He argued that scholars

should select—from each province to where the ʿUthmānic maṣāḥif were sent—certain

reciters on the basis of authenticity; integrity; deep knowledge in qirā’āt; extensive

experience in teaching Qira'at; correspondence of their qirā’āt with the orthography of

the ʿUthmānic maṣāḥif; and the consensus of the populace of the city on accepting their

qirā’ah.21

Al-Ṭabariyy in Kitāb al-Qirā’āt considered as authentic all qirā’āt that are

consistent with the orthography of the ʿUthmānic maṣāḥif and transmitted from the

Prophet through an authentic chain of transmission.22 Ibn Mujāhid introduced more

conditions, though they are more emphasized on the quality of the reciter rather than

the qirā’ah. They are:

1. The reciter should have flawless retention of the Qur’ān.

2. He should be well-versed in all varieties of iʿrāb, qirā’āt, and dialects.

3. He must rely on narration and isnād.

4. There must be consensus from the people of his province to recite according to

his qirā’ah.

Ibn Mujāhid maintained that the seven reciters of Hejaz, Iraq, and al-Shām

(whose qirā’āt are included in his Kitāb al-Sabʿah) were the students of the successors

(tābiʿīn), and that their qirā’āt were accepted unanimously in their own provinces and

their neighbors.23

20Al-Qur’ān. Al-Nisā’ 4:64. 21Al-Qushayriyy, ʿAbd al-Karīm ibn Hawāzin ibn ʿAbd al-Malik. 2007. Laṭā’if al-Ishārat. Bayrūt: Dār

al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah. Juz’ 1: p. 66. 22Al-Qaysiyy. 1977. Al-Ibānah. p. 53. 23Ibn Mujāhid. 1980. Kitāb al-Sabʿah fī al-Qirā’āt. p. 87.

10

Later, Makkiyy ibn Abī Ṭālib al-Qaysiyy formulated new criteria in his al-

Ibānah. Contrary to Ibn Mujāhid, they are more concerned with the qirā’ah itself rather

than the reciter. He considered a qirā’ah as authentic if it fulfils the three following

conditions:

1. Its transmission from the Prophet should be authentic.

2. It should be linguistically sound.

3. Its orthography should be consistent with one of the ʿUthmānic maṣāḥif.24

Ibn al-ʿArabī in al-ʿAwāṣim min al-Qawāṣim25 attributed these three conditions

to unnamed scholars and approved them.26 Ibn al-Jazariyy adopted and slightly

modified Makkiyy’s conditions:27

1. Authenticity of the chain of transmission.

2. Consistency with the Arabic language in fluency, even if it may be of lesser

eloquence.

3. Congruence with the orthography of one of the ʿUthmānic maṣāḥif, either

directly, e.g. the reading “Mālik”; or indirectly, i.e. in a way which is consistent

with the orthography, e.g. the reading “Malik” (without an elongated vowel).

He, elsewhere, had included the condition of tawātur of qirā’ah,28 though he

later changed this into authenticity, considering that the satisfaction of tawātur obviates

the need to seek other conditions.29 The authenticity of chain of narration here means

that it should consist of more than āhād (isolated) narrations, and that although it may

24Al-Qaysiyy. 1977. Al-Ibānah. pp. 5l, 90-91. 25Ibn al-ʿArabiyy, Abū Bakr. 1992. Al-ʿAwāṣim min al-Qawāṣim. Al-Qāhirah: Maktabah al-Sunnah. Juz’

2: p. 485. 26ibid. Juz’ 2: p. 485. 27Ibn al-Jazariyy. n.d. Al-Nashr. Juz’ 1: p. 9. 28Ibn al-Jazariyy, Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad. 1999. Munjid al-Muqri’īn wa Murshid al-Ṭālibīn. Bayrūt:

Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah. p. 15. 29Ibn al-Jazariyy. n.d. Al-Nashr. Juz’ 1: p. 13.

11

not be mutawātir, it should at least be mashhūr. This view was supported by Makkiyy,

al-Baghawiyy, al-Sakhāwiyy, Abū Shāmah, and Ibn al-Jazariyy,30 all of whom agreed

that a qirā’ah is acceptable if it is narrated through a sound, mashhūr chain; exhibits

fluency in Arabic; and conforms to the orthography of one of the ʿUthmānic maṣāḥif.

If any of these three conditions is not met, the qirā’ah should be rejected and regarded

as shādhdh.31 In support of his criteria, Ibn al-Jazariyy quoted other scholars before him,

including Makkiyy, al-Dāniyy, al-Mahdawiyy, Abū Shāmah, and al-Kawāshiyy.32 Ibn

al-ʿArabī, Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalāniyy, al-Qasṭallāniyy, and al-Suyūṭiyy also held the same

view, quoting many other named and unnamed proponents.33

Imam Ibn al-Jazariyy also listed three conditions for valid qirā’ah:

1. adherence to the rules of the Arabic language,

2. congruence with one of ʿUthmān’s maṣāḥif, and

3. transmitted through an authentic chain that traces back to the Prophet

A qirā’ah that fulfills these conditions can be considered as qirā’ah

mutawātirah. Any qirā’ah that fails to meet these conditions are considered

shādhdhah,34 the opposite of mutawātirah.35

In summary, most qirā’āt scholars have specified the following conditions for

an acceptable riwāyah:

30Al-Qaysiyy. 1977. Al-Ibānah. p. 5l; Abū Shāmah, Shihāb al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān. 2003. Al-Murshid

al-Wajīz ilā ʿUlūm Tataʿallaq bi al-Kitāb al-ʿAzīz. Bayrūt: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah. p. 145, 172; Ibn

al-Jazariyy. n.d. Al-Nashr. Juz’ 1: p. 13. 31ibid. 32Ibn al-Jazariyy. n.d. Al-Nashr. Juz’ 1: p. 9, 44; Al-Suyūṭiyy, Jalāl al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān. 2005. Al-

Itqān fī ʿUlūm al-Qur’ān. Al-Madīnah al-Munawwarah: Mujammaʿ al-Malik Fahd li Ṭabāʿah al-Muṣḥaf

al-Sharīf. Juz’ 1: p. 210. 33Ibn al-ʿArabiyy. 1992. Al-Awāṣim min al-Qawāṣim. Juz’ 2: p. 485; al-ʿAsqalāniyy, Ibn Ḥajar. 2013.

Fatḥ al-Bārī bi Sharḥ Ṣaḥīh al-Bukhāriyy. Bayrūt: Dār al-Risālah al-ʿIlmiyyah. Juz’ 9: p. 32; al-

Qushayriyy. 2007. Laṭā’if al-Ishārāt. Juz’ 1: p. 6; al-Suyūṭiyy. 2005. Al-Itqān. Juz’ 1: p. 225. 34The term is attached to a variant of recitation that was irregular for one or more reasons. 35Ibn al-Jazariyy. 1999. Munjid al-Muqri’īn. p. 18.

12

1. Transmitted through an authentic, continuous chain of narration.

2. Conformance to Arabic grammatical constructions.

3. Conformance to one of ʿUthmānic Qur’ān.

However, according to al-Jabūriyy, the only condition for authentic qirā’ah is

the authenticity of its isnād, which necessarily includes the two other requirements of

fluency and consistency with orthography.36 According to al-Hudhalliyy in al-Kāmil,

all qirā’āt that conform the maṣāḥif should be accepted, providing that they do not

contradict the consensus.37 Al-Zarqāniyy explained that certain scholars did not include

tawātur as a criterion of valid qirā’ah since the Qur’ān itself is mutawātir. Therefore,

the fulfillment of those three conditions should be sufficient to regard a qirā’ah as

mutawātir.38 Al-Nuwayriyy objected to this view, arguing that the majority of scholars,

including al-Ghazāliyy, Ibn al-Ḥājib, Ibn ʿ Abd al-Barr, Ibn ʿ Atiyyah, al-Nawāwiyy, and

al-Zarkashiyy, regarded tawātur as a condition for the acceptability of a qirā’ah. He

further stated that excluding tawātur as a criterion is an innovation and stands against

the consensus of jurists, hadith scholars, and others. Al-Nuwayriyy suggested that

Makkiyy was the first to hold this opinion, and he was later followed by some late

scholars.39 Al-Bannā, supporting al-Nuwayriyy, claimed that Makkiyy was the first

scholar to not impose the condition of tawātur for the authenticity of qirā’ah.40

There were also cases where, despite failing to meet one or more conditions of

a valid qirā’āh, which means that its recitation is bidʿah (innovation), a narrator

36Ibn al-Jazariyy. n.d. Al-Nashr. Juz’ 1: p. 13; al-Suyūṭiyy. 2005. Al-Itqān. Juz’ 1: p. 211. 37Ibn al-Jazariyy. n.d. Al-Nashr. Juz’ 1: p. 37. 38Al-Zarqāniyy. 1943. Manāhil al-ʿIrfān. Juz’ 1: p. 427. 39Al-Qushayriyy. 2007. Laṭā’if al-Ishārāt. Juz’ 1: p. 70. 40Al-Bannā, Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad. 1987. Itḥāf Fuḍalā’ al-Bashar bi al-Qirā’āt al-Arbaʿah ʿAshr.

Bayrūt: ʿĀlim al-Kutub. Juz’ 1: p. 6.

13

continued reciting according to his own narration. Because of this, qirā’āt scholars such

as Ibn Mujāhid had confronted such bidʿah reciters to deter them.41

1.2 Problem Statement

Scholars have agreed on the conditions that determine the validity of any qirā’āt.

Ibn Mujāhid had included qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir as one of the seven qirā’āt mutawātirah as

it was consistent with al-Muṣḥaf al-Shāmi,42 one of ʿUthmān’s maṣāḥif distributed to

the provinces.43 Ibn Mujāhid had placed qirā’ah Ibn ʿ Āmir under rigorous investigation,

and he found it to be mutawātir and authentic in its uṣūl and ṭuruq.

On the other hand, al-Ṭabariyy rejected qirā’ah Ibn ʿ Āmir, as he explicitly stated

in Jāmiʿ al-Bayān.44 Al-Ṭabariyy was one of the earliest scholars to systematically

collect qirā’āt of the Qur’ān. In fact, Ibn Mujāhid was one of his students.45

Furthermore, al-Ṭabariyy was a diligent scholar from the Shāfiʿiyy school, whose

methodology combines prophetic traditions and jurisprudence. Though al-Ṭabariyy’s

book in qirā’āt is lost, his remaining books preserve a wealth of information concerning

his views on qirā’āt. One such book is Tafsīr al-Ṭabariyy.46 However, this important

work has not escaped criticisms and misapprehensions. One such area concerns al-

41During Ibn Mujāhid’s time, there were two instances where bidʿah readers had been tried. They were

Ibn Miqsam and Ibn Shannabūdh, the latter of whom had chosen his own way of reading. This decision

was vigorously opposed by Ibn Mujāhid. For that, Ibn Shannabūdh was arraigned before a tribunal of

judges and qurrā’. After receiving ten strokes of the whip, he was duly released. Similarly, his

contemporary Ibn Miqsam was also punished because of his reading. 42Ibn Mujāhid. 1980. Kitāb al-Sabʿah fī al-Qirā’āt. p. 87. 43Abū Shuhbah, Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad. 1987. Al-Madkhal li Dirāsah al-Qur’ān al-Karīm. Al-

Riyāḍ: Dār al-Liwā’. p. 278. 44Al-Ṭabariyy, Muḥammad ibn Jarīr. 1994. Jāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿ an Ta’wīl Āy al-Qur’ān. Bayrūt: Mu’assasah

al-Risālah. Juz’ 12: p. 137. 45Ibn al-Jazariyy, Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad. 2006. Ghāyah al-Nihāyah fī Ṭabaqāt al-Qurrā’. Bayrūt:

Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah. Juz’ 1: p. 140. 46Al-Ṭabariyy had compiled a book, now lost to us, in which he collected more than 20 qirā’āt. See: Ibn

al-Jazariyy. n.d. Al-Nashr. Juz’ 1: p. 89.

14

Ṭabariyy’s views and arguments regarding qirā’āt, lending to his differing opinions

(khilāf) on the subject.

Al-Ṭabariyy based his rejection of qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir on his own criteria, which

are different to Ibn Mujāhid’s. This disagreement may have stemmed from their

different views on mutawātir. Al-Ṭabariyy adopted hadith scholars’ definition of

mutawātir, that is, the qirā’ah must be transmitted by a large number of narrators at

each level of the chain. Qirā’āt scholars largely agree that a qirā’ah should be rejected

if it fails to meet the mutawātir criterion even if it has satisfied the other two conditions.

Therefore, in al-Ṭabariyy’s opinion, qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir did not qualify because its chain

of transmission had not reached the mutawātir level.

The above discussion leads to the following inquiry: since al-Ṭabariyy has

presented his opinions in al-Bayān and obviously has a strong influence over his

students, including Ibn Mujāhid, why did Ibn Mujāhid still regard qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir as

mutawātir in Kitāb al-Sabʿah? One likely hypothesis is that the disagreement between

Ibn Mujāhid and al-Ṭabariyy on qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir was not influenced by their student-

teacher relationship but by their individual understanding of the concept of mutawātir

and other criteria of a valid qirā’ah.

1.3 Research Objectives

1. To discuss the development of the seven qirā’āt before and during the life of

Imam Ibn ʿĀmir .

2. To analyze the concept of mutawātir according to Imam al-Ṭabariyy and Imam

Ibn Mujāhid.

15

3. To discuss the factors behind the rejection and approval of qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir by

Imam al-Ṭabariyy and Imam Ibn Mujāhid.

4. To evaluate the chain, ṭuruq, and uṣūl of qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir through scholarly

works during that era.

1.4 Research Questions

1. How was qirā’āt developed before and during the era of Imam Ibn ʿĀmir?

2. What is the concept of mutawātir according to Imam al-Ṭabariyy and Imam Ibn

Mujāhid?

3. What are the factors behind Imam al-Ṭabariyy and Imam Ibn Mujāhid’s

rejection and approval of qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir?

4. How did scholars of that era evaluate the chain, ṭuruq, and uṣūl of qirā’ah Ibn

ʿĀmir?

1.5 Limitations of The Study

The scope of the study covers the views of al-Ṭabariyy and Ibn Mujāhid on

qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir based on their books Jāmiʿ al-Bayān and Kitāb al-Sabʿah. The study

focuses on the rationales and arguments behind the decision of each scholar to either

accept or reject qirā’ah Ibn ʿ Āmir. The two scholars’ stance on other qirā’āt are omitted

from the study. Moreover, the concept of mutawātir will be defined and clarified. The

researcher will examine the views of hadith scholars on qirā’āt to support the research

and answer its questions.

16

1.6 Significance of The Study

Until recently, there have not been many academic works on qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir,

especially in English. Most authors of qirā’āt in English are non-Arabic speakers and

non-specialists. They refer to the subject only briefly in their work, causing confusion

among readers. This study attempts to clear this confusion and to investigate the subject

in depth, and it may serve as a reference for researchers and students of Islamic studies

for authentic information about qirā’āt in English. Additionally, some controversies

have emerged regarding qirā’āt, and a group of scholars have embraced those

controversies. This thesis attempts to clarify them and academically discuss the

scholars’ opinions.

1.7 Terms of the Study

Because the subject of the thesis originates in the Arabic world, and since there

are terms that have no equivalent in English, the author will mostly use established

Arabic nomenclatures throughout the discourse to prevent misunderstandings or

misinterpretations. The terms are defined below.47

1. Qirā’āt (pl., s. qirā’ah): variants of recitation. It is derived from the verb qara’a,

which means reading or reciting. The verbal noun “Qur’ān”, which means

recitation, is its cognate. Technically, it denotes the oral recitation of the Qur’ān.

2. Qurrā’ (pl., s. qāri’): a renowned reader of the Quran to whom a qirā’ah is

attributed.

3. Rāwī: narrator, the person who narrates a qirā’ah.

47However, not all terms have been defined here; some are described in footnotes throughout the text.

17

4. Tajwīd: the rules and principles of perfect recitation.

5. Al-aḥruf al-sabʿah: the seven modes. Sabʿah means seven, and aḥruf is the

plural form of ḥarf, which has various meanings, including border, letter, and

word. Technically, they denote the modes in which the Qur’ān was revealed.

They are also expressed in various forms of writing.

6. Ummah: Islamic nation.

7. Maṣāḥif: the copies of the Qur’ān written by order of Caliph ʿ Uthmān ibn ʿ Affān

.

8. Al-Muṣḥaf al-Shāmi: an ʿUthmānic Qur’ān that was sent to the Levante.

9. Bidʿah: innovations.

10. Ikhtiyār: choosing one of the several qirā’āt.

11. Sanad ṣaḥīḥ: authentic chain of a qirā’ah.

12. Shādhdhah: irregular (i.e. a qirā’ah that does not meet the criteria of valid

qirā’āt).

13. Mutawātir: regular (i.e. a reading is considered mutawātir when it has a good

chain of narrators and high reliability).

14. Ṭuruq: various chains of narrators.

15. Uṣūl: principles.

16. Isnād: the chain of transmission. The list of names of those who narrated a

qirā’ah, beginning from his teacher and ending at the Prophet.

17. Ṣaḥīḥ: sound and correct.

18

1.8 Research Methodology

This section discusses the methods of data collection and analysis employed to

answer the research questions.

1.8.1 Data Collection

Data for the study were collected primarily from al-Ṭabariyy’s Jāmiʿ al-Bayān

ʿan Ta’wīl al-Qur’ān and Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿah. Other sources include books

on qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir, hadith texts, articles, and other academic publications related to

the topic.

1.8.2 Data Analysis

The descriptive-analytic method was employed in the study. The study falls into

the category of qualitative research. No surveys and interviews were involved. Instead,

it was carried out through library research and review of documents and scholarly

works. This study identifies and analyzes the uṣūl and ṭuruq of qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir

according to al-Ṭabariyy and Ibn Mujāhid and their criteria to validate qirā’ah. It also

verifies the authenticity of the qirā’ah and explores the concept of mutawātir from the

perspective of hadith scholars. Hadith principles were used to establish whether it is

permissible to employ mutawātir as the only qualifying criteria while disregarding the

other two conditions.

All Qur’ānic translations in this study were based on Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s The

Holy Qur’ān, Text, Translation and Commentary. Translations from other sources will

be noted accordingly. The Arabic transliteration guide has been included at the

beginning of this thesis. The Arabic terms used in the study have been defined in English

19

terms to prevent any misapprehension. However, due to the specific nomenclatures of

the science, only the Arabic terms will be used henceforth. Finally, Arabic Qur’ānic

verses were used to show the differences between qirā’āt.

1.9 Literature Review

1.9.1 Dissertations

Al-Amīn48 discussed only the grammatical contents and issues in al-Ṭabariyy’s

al-Bayān. As it was a linguistics research, the author did not include al-Ṭabariyy’s view

on qirā’āt, much less Ibn Mujāhid’s.

Al-Shawāwirah49 discussed the contents of Jāmiʿ al-Bayān through the lens of

contemporary linguistics. She did not mention qirā’āt unless they related to

grammatical rules and parsing.

Ḥadījān50 explores grammar and language in Jāmiʿ al-Bayān. The researcher

mentioned some verses in various qirā’āt and discussed them grammatically and

linguistically without identifying the readers of the qirā’āt. He also did not specify

which qirā’ah was or was not transmitted by a continuous chain of rūwat, nor did he

identify which qirā’ah was rejected or accepted. The criteria for a valid qirā’ah was

also absent from the study.

48Al-Amīn, Amīn Bābakir Muḥammad. 2012. Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabariyy wa Juhūduh al-Naḥwiyyah fī Tafsīrih

Jāmiʿ al-Bayān. (PhD Thesis). Jāmiʿah Umm Durmān al-Islāmiyyah. 49Al-Shawāwirah, Yāsmīn Khalaf. 2011. Al-Asālīb al-Naḥwiyyah fī Tafsīr al-Ṭabariyy Jāmiʿ al-Bayān

ʿan Ta’wīl Āy al-Qur’ān: Dirāsah Taḥlīliyyah fī Ḍaw’ ʿIlm al-Lughah al-Muʿaṣarah. (PhD Thesis).

Jāmiʿah Mu’tah. 50Ḥadījān, Jamāl Ramaḍān Ḥaymid. 2010. Al-Nazʿah al-Naḥwiyyah ʿinda Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabariyy fī

Tafsīrih. (PhD Thesis). Jāmiʿah Umm al-Qurā.

20

Sawbakī51 discusses the impact of different qirā’āt on Qur’ānic interpretation,

with a focus on sūrah al-Baqarah in Jāmiʿ al-Bayān. The author explored the effects of

these differences from the viewpoints of linguistics, morphology, and Shariah.

However, he did not touch upon the origins of qirā’āt or their definitions, nor did he

talk about Imam Ibn Mujāhid.

ʿAlī52 discussed the qirā’āt that have been criticized by scholars, including

qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir. She explained that these famous qirā’āt were rejected largely for

grammatical reasons. However, she did not elaborate on the scholars’ conditions of

accepting al-qirā’āt al-mutawātirah. The dissertation discusses solely the topic of

solecism and its rectification. The topics of Imam Al-Ṭabarī as a scholar, qirā’ah Ibn

ʿĀmir, and the Imam’s view of the qirā’ah are not discussed by the work.

Al-Khawālidah53 discussed omission (hadhf) in some Qur’ānic qirā’āt. The

arguments are presented in two chapters: the first covers the concept and meaning of

qirā’āt, and the second presents the reciters’ justifications for omission. The researcher

only discussed al-Ṭabariyy’s views linguistically and grammatically.

ammād54 interpreted the Qur’ān based on the ten qirā’āt. She began with the

definition of qirā’āt and seven aḥruf. In a chapter, she introduced the reciters, narrators,

and chains of narrators of the ten qirā’āt. This thesis primarily focuses on interpretation,

while the subject of qirā’āt was only slightly touched upon.

51Sawbakī, Ibrāhīm Muḥammad. 2010. Athar al-Qirā’āt fī Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-Karīm: Dirāsah

Taḥliliyyah fī Tafsīr al-Imām al-Ṭabariyy li Sūrah al-Baqarah. (Master’s Thesis). International Islamic

University Malaysia. 52ʿAlī, Mayy Ṣālīh Naṣr. 2008. Al-Qirā’āt al-Mashhūrah allatī Taʿarraḍat li al-Taʿn wa al-Laḥn. (PhD

Thesis). Jāmiʿah al-Kharṭūm. 53Al-Khawālidah, Mājid Aḥmad. 2008. Al-Hadhf fī al-Qirā’āt al-Qur’āniyyah fī Tafsīr al-Ṭabariyy.

(Master’s Thesis). Jāmiʿah Mu’tah. 54Ḥammād, Āmāl Khamīs. 2006. Tafsīr al-Qur’ān bi al-Qirā’āt al-Qur’āniyyah al-ʿAshr min Khilāl

Suwar al-Isrā’ wa al-Kahf wa Maryam. (Master’s Thesis). Al-Jāmiʿah al-Islāmiyyah Ghazzah.

21

Miqdādiyy55 discussed qirā’ah Ibn ʿ Āmir from a linguistics viewpoint. He relied

on Ibn Mujāhid’s Kitāb al-Sabʿa to analyze the research subject phonologically and

grammatically. However, he did not include other scholars’ opinions on qirā’ah Ibn

ʿĀmir.

Fallātah56 discussed the concept, development, and impact of ikhtiyār on qirā’āt.

He also introduced the Imams who talked about ikhtiyār in a chapter. However, the

author neglected the mention of the qirā’āt, the choices that were made, and Imam Ibn

Jarīr’s criteria of ikhtiyār.

ʿUthmān57 studied al-qirā’āt al-mutawātirah that Ibn Jarīr Al-Ṭabariyy rejected

in his Tafsīr, beginning from sūrah al-Fātiḥah until sūrah al-Tawbah. He also discussed

al-Ṭabariyy’s ikhtiyār and preference for some qirā’āt. The thesis contains three

chapters, the last of which is reserved for Imam al-Ṭabariyy’s rejection of some qirā’āt.

The researcher, however, did not mention al-Ṭabariyy’s conditions of approving or

rejecting those qirā’āt and his role in accrediting certain qirā’āt. In addition, he did not

mention whether those rejected variants were among the seven qirā’āt specified by Ibn

Mujāhid and whether their chains of narrations were known to Imam Al-Ṭabariyy.

Bābakir58 discussed the qirā’āt in Imam Al-Ṭabariyy‘s Tafsīr without

considering their validity. He then analyzed them through a linguistic lens and identified

their grammatical and morphological solecisms. This dissertation is a linguistics inquiry

that ignores Imam Ibn Mujāhid or other qirā’āt.

55Miqdādiyy, Maḥmūd Muṣṭafā Ṣalāḥ. 2005. Al-Ẓawāhir al-Ṣawtiyyah wa al-Naḥwiyyah fī Qirā’ah

ʿAbdillāh ibn ʿĀmir. (Master’s Thesis). Jāmiʿah Āl al-Bayt. 56Fallātah, Amīn ibn Idrīs. 2001. Al-Ikhtiyār ʿinda al-Qurrā’: Mafḥumuh Maraḥiluh wa Atharuh fī al-

Qirā’āt. (Master’s Thesis). Jāmiʿah Umm al-Qurā. 57ʿUthmān, Muḥammad ʿĀrif. 1986. Al-Qirā’āt al-Mutawātirah allatī Ankharahā Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī wa

al-Radd ʿAlaih. (Master’s Thesis). Al-Jāmiʿah al-Islāmiyyah bi al-Madīnah al-Munawwarah. 58Bābakir, Aḥmad Khālid. 1983. Al-Qirā’āt ʿinda Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabariyy fī Ḍaw’ al-Lughah wa al-Naḥw

Kamā Waradat fī Kitābih Jāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Ta’wīl Āy al-Qur’ān. (PhD Thesis). Jāmiʿah Umm al-Qurā.

22

1.9.2 Published Research

Al-Quḍāh59 studied Imam Ibn Mujāhid’s contribution in developing a scientific

approach to validating qirā’āt. However, he did not discuss the qirā’āt, their

foundations, or other scholars’ opinions. The current study attempts to fill these gaps.

Al-Ibrāhimiyy60 discussed the definition of seven qirā’āt and profiles of the

reciters, as well as rebutting some attacks directed to the Holy Qur’ān by missionaries.

These missionaries attempt to distort the image of Islam through certain approaches,

one of which is qirā’āt. They considered the existence of many qirā’āt as a flaw, but

this misconception was refuted by the researcher. However, the book was short and

does not cover all misconceptions and refutations.

ʿAbd al-Shakūr61 justified Imam al-Ṭabariyy’s rejection of certain qirā’āt,

which has invited much criticism from many researchers. He argued that Imam al-

Ṭabariyy might had made these verdicts due to his own concept of ikhtiyār and

preference. The research, as made clear by the title, is mainly concerned with the

defense of Imam al-Ṭabariyy, and as such the views of other scholars were

unmentioned.

Shalabiyy62 defined and discussed ikhtiyār as a concept, before analyzing Imam

al-Ṭabariyy’s selection of valid qirā’āt in his Tafsīr. He concluded that Imam Al-

59Al-Quḍāh, Aḥmad Muḥammad. 2016. “Ibn Mujāhid al-Tamīmiyy wa al-Manhaj al-Taʿlīmiyy li al-

Qirā’āt al-Qur’āniyyah”. Dirāsāt ʿUlūm al-Sharīʿah wa al-Qanūn. ʿAmmān: al-Jāmiʿah al-Urduniyyah.

Vol. 43 No. 1. pp. 581-592. 60Al-Ibrāhimiyy, Muḥammad. 2013. Seven Readings, One Holy Book and the Gratuitous Attacks. n.pl:

n.pb. 61ʿAbd al-Shakūr, Sāmī Muḥammad Saʿīd. 2011. Tabarru’ah al-Imām al-Ṭabariyy al-Mufassir min al-

Ṭaʿn fī al-Qirā’āt fī Ikhtiyārih li al-Mashhūr minhā wa Radd al-Shawādhdh. ʿAmmān: Dār ʿAmmār. 62Shalabiyy, ʿAbd al-Fattāḥ Ismāʿīl. 1996. Al-Ikhtiyār fī al-Qirā’āt Mansha’uh wa Mashrūʿiyyatuh wa

Tabarru’ah al-Imām al-Ṭabariyy min Tuhmah Inkār al-Qirā’āt al-Mutawātirah. Al-Madīnah al-

Munawwarah: Jāmiʿah Umm al-Qurā.

23

Ṭabariyy did not deny any al-qirā’āt al-mutawātirah. The researcher did not compare

between the conflicting views of Imam al-Ṭabariyy and Imam Ibn Mujāhid.

After presenting the above, it must be said that previous studies can be

summarized in three directions:

The first is the historical studies that dealt with the historical aspect and

presented it in detail for instant: Sawbakī, Ibrāhīm Muḥammad in his thesis Athar al-

Qirā’āt fī Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-Karīm: Dirāsah Taḥliliyyah fī Tafsīr al-Imām al-

Ṭabariyy li Sūrah al-Baqarah.

The second aspect is the linguistic aspect, which was a lot in previous studies

and dealt with the linguistic aspects in terms of rhetoric, grammar, and morphology in

particular without talking about the origins such as Al-Amīn, Amīn Bābakir

Muḥammad in his thesis. Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabariyy wa Juhūduh al-Naḥwiyyah fī Tafsīrih

Jāmiʿ al-Bayān. And Al-Shawāwirah, Yāsmīn Khalaf in his thesis Al-Asālīb al-

Naḥwiyyah fī Tafsīr al-Ṭabariyy Jāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Ta’wīl Āy al-Qur’ān: Dirāsah

Taḥlīliyyah fī Ḍaw’ ʿIlm al-Lughah al-Muʿaṣarah.

And the third is the guidance books (Tawjihu qirā’āt) that dealt with the causes

of the readings without going into comparisons between the readers for example:

Fallātah, Amīn ibn Idrīs in his thesis Al-Ikhtiyār ʿ inda al-Qurrā’: Mafḥumuh Maraḥiluh

wa Atharuh fī al-Qirā’āt.

Finally, it can be said that no previous study according to my findings dealt with

al-Tabari and Ibn Mujahid together.

24

1.10 Structure of the Thesis

The study discusses Imam Al-Ṭabariyy and Imam Ibn Mujāhid’s views on

qirā’āt, specifically their opinions on qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir. The study also highlights the

opinions of scholars regarding Al-Ṭabariyy’s rejection of qirā’ah Ibn ʿĀmir.

In Chapter Two, the study will present a brief biography of Ibn ʿĀmir and his

two students. It will also discuss the principles of his qirā’ah and explain their

application in his muṣḥaf.

Chapter Three discusses the development of qirā’āt before and during the times

of Ibn ʿĀmir. It begins with a discourse on the meaning of the seven aḥruf, before

discussing the two phases of qirā’āt development.

Chapter Four elucidates the concept of mutawātir, including its definition and

criteria, according to hadith and qirā’āt scholars. The views of Ibn Mujāhid and al-

Ṭabariyy on the subject are also discussed.

Chapter Five presents the arguments of al-Ṭabariyy and Ibn Mujāhid to

respectively reject and accept Ibn ʿĀmir’s qirā’ah. The assessment methods and

justifications of both, as well as the contentions against them, are discoursed. The

chapter concludes with the analysis of the author.